Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix how we structure the run notebook rules. #1384

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 3, 2019
Merged

Conversation

ttung
Copy link
Collaborator

@ttung ttung commented May 30, 2019

With this change, one can just run make notebooks/py/smFISH.py

Also, we run all notebooks with ipython instead of python now.

@ttung ttung requested a review from ambrosejcarr May 30, 2019 08:42
@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented May 30, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #1384 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1384   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   89.49%   89.49%           
=======================================
  Files         151      151           
  Lines        5482     5482           
=======================================
  Hits         4906     4906           
  Misses        576      576

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 2ec85ce...8e5a64d. Read the comment docs.

@ttung ttung force-pushed the tonytung-notebook-rules branch 3 times, most recently from 85045a8 to 37176b6 Compare May 31, 2019 06:58
With this change, one can just run `make notebooks/py/smFISH.py` or `make smFISH.py`.

For the examples in `docs/source/_static/data_processing_examples/`, we can also directly invoke them, i.e., `make 3d_smFISH.py`.

Also, we run all notebooks with ipython instead of python now.
@ttung ttung force-pushed the tonytung-notebook-rules branch from 37176b6 to 8e5a64d Compare May 31, 2019 08:37
Copy link
Member

@ambrosejcarr ambrosejcarr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Great. 👍

@ttung ttung merged commit 61d0375 into master Jun 3, 2019
@ttung ttung deleted the tonytung-notebook-rules branch June 3, 2019 18:58
ttung pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 2, 2019
This should unbreak the cronjob.  I think I broke this in #1384.  Whoops!
ttung pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 2, 2019
This should unbreak the cronjob.  I think I broke this in #1384.  Whoops!
@ttung ttung mentioned this pull request Jul 24, 2019
ttung pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 30, 2019
In #1384, I made it such that someone could run `make notebooks/py/xxxx.py` and run the notebook.  Unfortunately, that created a dependency between the rule that regenerated the .ipynb file and the notebook running rule.  This is not desirable, as regenerating the .ipynb files take forever now.

This PR breaks that dependency.  The idea is that the notebook regeneration process is so lightweight that we don't really need to examine the mtimes, and just do it blindly.

Test: make -j validate-ipynb does not run the notebooks
ttung pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 23, 2019
In #1384, I made it such that someone could run `make notebooks/py/xxxx.py` and run the notebook.  Unfortunately, that created a dependency between the rule that regenerated the .ipynb file and the notebook running rule.  This is not desirable, as regenerating the .ipynb files take forever now.

This PR breaks that dependency.  The idea is that the notebook regeneration process is so lightweight that we don't really need to examine the mtimes, and just do it blindly.

Test: make -j validate-ipynb does not run the notebooks
ttung pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 26, 2019
In #1384, I made it such that someone could run `make notebooks/py/xxxx.py` and run the notebook.  Unfortunately, that created a dependency between the rule that regenerated the .ipynb file and the notebook running rule.  This is not desirable, as regenerating the .ipynb files take forever now.

This PR breaks that dependency.  The idea is that the notebook regeneration process is so lightweight that we don't really need to examine the mtimes, and just do it blindly.

Test: make -j validate-ipynb does not run the notebooks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants